Peace is dearer to the Korean people than to any others as they have been exposed to the constant danger of war for more than half a century.

The DPRK's proposal is the most proper and realistic one for bringing about a new phase in giving substantial guarantee for defusing the tension on the Korean Peninsula, putting an end to foreign interference and settling the issue of reunification on the principle of the right to national self-determination and the most reasonable one for achieving peace and development in Asia and other parts of the world.

But some quarters are putting a brake on the moves to put it into practice, asserting that "it is still premature to conclude such treaty" and "it is necessary for the DPRK to return to the six-party talks, to begin with." In a word, their assertion is that the nuclear issue should be taken up before anything else.

What they assert is to build a house without a foundation. This cannot be construed otherwise than rhetoric intended to play down the realistic and reasonable nature of the proposal and stand in the way of achieving peace and stability and denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Discussion on the issue of establishing a peace-keeping regime is urgently required to realize in a coordinated manner the denuclearization, normalization of relations, energy compensation and establishment of a peace-keeping regime and other clauses stipulated in the Sept. 19 joint statement.

It is illogical to assert that the establishment of the peace-keeping regime is the matter to be taken up after the nuclear issue is settled. This is nothing but an artifice to dodge the proposal.

The talks had been held for several years by the modality of discussing the denuclearization before taking up the issue of establishing a peace-keeping regime only to end in failure. This stark reality goes to prove that anything that started without confidence can never yield good results.

No problem can be solved unless confidence is built among the parties concerned.

It is the purpose of the DPRK's proposal to put an end to the vicious cycle of distrust and build confidence to push forward the denuclearization.

Now is the time to replace the AA by a peace treaty.

An early conclusion of a peace treaty to replace the AA would make it possible to turn the acute belligerent relations between the DPRK and the U.S. into those of peace and confidence and achieve lasting peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

An early opening of the negotiations for concluding a peace treaty is very proper and reasonable both in the light of the tense situation prevailing on the peninsula, the requirement of the year which marks the lapse of 60 years since the outbreak of the Korean War and the present trend of the development of the international situation.

The conclusion of a peace treaty would help build confidence between the DPRK and the U.S. to put an end to the hostile relations between them and put a strong impetus to the denuclearization of the peninsula.